Why Netflix Wonhttp://www.businessinsider.com/why-netflix-won-2010-10/comments
en-usWed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 -0500Tue, 03 Mar 2015 14:25:40 -0500David Pakmanhttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cfebbb249e2aeaf76090000Horse Tack ShopTue, 07 Dec 2010 17:56:49 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cfebbb249e2aeaf76090000
Netflix wins because of the awesome service it provides- unlimited online streaming, mail delivered DVD and no late fee!
<a href=http://www.horsefriendly.com> horse tack shop </a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccac6df49e2ae7556090000TJGodelFri, 29 Oct 2010 09:06:39 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccac6df49e2ae7556090000
I am a Netflix subscriber and the service, but mail delivered DVD and streaming are much better than Comcast cable. I would love to plug the plug on the cable and have only Netflix and Internet available content, Comcast as the worst service.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc9efeaccd1d5125f100000mbevilThu, 28 Oct 2010 17:49:30 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc9efeaccd1d5125f100000
that wasn't meant for @aaronlbeltran - was just a general comment on the article.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc9efa849e2ae950c010000mbevilThu, 28 Oct 2010 17:48:24 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc9efa849e2ae950c010000
I think an important piece of the puzzle that you are missing is that Netflix did a really good job of getting to where there now are one step at a time. When they launched they provided a great service to what was the main technology at the time...DVD players. As broadband adoption accelerated and they had the ability to offer streaming in a reliable way, they did.
Now, as more hardware devices (phones, PCs, TVs, game consoles) can properly handle entertainment streaming, Netflix is there. As I have watched technology companies over the last 25 years, I think the biggest mistake I see (and a huge reason why they fail) is that companies think that "Wal-Mart America" is like them and their co-workers. They try to push products out to a mass, at price-points that exceed natural consumer price-points, and before the infrastructure is there to handle it well. Netflix has done a phenomenal job evolving their product as Americans were ready to adopt it at each new stage.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc877f9ccd1d5a71b040000aaronlbeltranWed, 27 Oct 2010 15:05:29 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc877f9ccd1d5a71b040000
Winner, winner, chicken dinner. Now only if they optimized their recommendation methods....http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc856f5ccd1d56a14130000ErikWed, 27 Oct 2010 12:44:36 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc856f5ccd1d56a14130000
You're mistaken here, Netflix is still held to the traditional distribution windows where they play in the windows that subscription based streaming is licensed. They may have amassed large licensing deals within that window -more so than any other licensee- but they did not solve anything new on the licensing front.
Per the other commentors, their success is due to customer service, identifing customer value, and plain old operational rigor.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc797adccd1d54e73380000John MitchellTue, 26 Oct 2010 23:08:29 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc797adccd1d54e73380000
David's piece is solid, but I would take issue with one clause -- and I don't think he really meant what he said: "There is no first sale doctrine in digital goods". The truth is, DVDs have always been "digital goods". In context, it is clear that what David is referring to is streaming, which is the public performance of the work, and for which Netflix does need permission. We are not free to stream our DVDs without a license, but the reason is because of the public performance right in the "work" of authorship -- the intangible movie ("audiovisual work") itself -- regardless whether it is publicly performed digitally, by an analog televised broadcast, or even live onstage.
What might be interesting in streaming would be "open menu/open pricing" style of menu in place of the "negotiating painful voluntary licenses" David refers to. The cost of those painful negotiations only serve to tighten margins, drive up prices, and advantaged unlicensed and illegal services. The first sale doctrine's value was not just in giving everyone who owns a legal copy the right to sell it, lend it or give it away. It also meant that pricing had to be fairly non-discriminatory. Charging one retailer more, for example, was a nonstarter, since the disfavored retailer could buy from anyone who owned a copy. Under licensed streaming, the temptation will always be there to provide a worse deal for whoever has such a good service that it draws customers away from the service that delivers better revenue along with less customer satisfaction. Yielding to that temptation usually results in a lose-lose proposition. Just as sellers list their prices and sell to whoever is willing to pay the listed price, it might be refreshing to see streaming licenses work the same way: Publish the price, and license any reputable company willing to pay it, on the same terms as all other licensees, and let the better service win while concurrently squeezing out the pirates.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc72552cadcbbf1260d0000MarinaTue, 26 Oct 2010 15:00:33 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc72552cadcbbf1260d0000
I must add that Netflix' rating algorythm, plus other viewers' evaluations allow me to watch pieces I would not have come up with on my own.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc724774bd7c84530010000David PakmanTue, 26 Oct 2010 14:56:55 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc724774bd7c84530010000
I completely agree that Netflix built an amazing service with an incredible customer-first philosophy. And I don't want to under-appreciate how much of a role that has played in their success. My point is that they could never have gotten to that point without solving the rights riddle.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc723decadcbbc9260c0000FidelTue, 26 Oct 2010 14:54:22 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc723decadcbbc9260c0000
Tower Records once threatened my credit score when I protested that I had returned a movie before the midnight cutoff. Where are they now?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc71d4e4bd7c8b22e090000corqTue, 26 Oct 2010 14:26:22 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cc71d4e4bd7c8b22e090000
While the business mechanics of Netflix definitely put it ahead in the content delivery infrastructure area, please don't underestimate customer server and philosophy.
They've managed to deliver on the widest array of devices already designed for media and entertainment consumption.
Whereby Blockbuster, its original Goliath competition, waited, charged late fees and/or higher rental fees for New Release titles, and deliberately made rental return times ambiguous to the customer and collected a premium on the confusion. I specifically quit renting titles from BB because my daily errands were already crazy enough that I didn't want to risk rent, then forgetting to return the disks. I get the impression, as RedBox started to gain popularity that this was felt by more folks than just myself.
Netflix obviously did away with return times on movies; then with streaming, I get a courteous email (opt-in) asking about the quality. This could all be marketing gimmick, but its "that thing" that competitors chronically failed to do: give good customer service, and pay attention to feed back. Personally, that's built the most customer "good will" with regard to my Netflix loyalty. This should really be taken seriously when anyone speaks about NetFlix's success story: Quality Customer Service.